As described in my essay “gods and monsters” we have established that man has spent nearly 200.000 years looking for a meaning with life and a purpose to his existence and that for a great many people, this has been found in the forms of the great narratives offered by the movements of religion, ideology and historical ideas such as the enlightenment. However, as we are more and more connected, knowledgeable and with the world accessible at the touch of our fingers — does this still hold true?

Philosopher and writer, Jean-Francis Lyotard would say no. In his work, The Postmodern Condition (1979), he argues that we are increasingly sceptic towards grand narratives and the totalizing nature of universal, or single, truths. Lyotard describes this as a key characteristic of the postmodern condition.[1]

“God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. Yet his shadow still looms. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it?”

(Nietzsche, 1882, p125)

But if god is dead and the great narratives of religion, Marxism and modernism no longer holds sway over our lives, how then do we align our lives to each other? As the postmodern human has rejected the grand narratives, smaller and more localized narratives have appeared, where, like Marxism and Capitalism, we are the masters of our own stories, we manage our own lives and create our own brands. Nevertheless, unlike the grand narratives of Christianity and the enlightened ideas of modernism, our aim is no longer to the greater good of the whole, but rather, perhaps to the eventual collapse of modern society?, we focus on our own personal growth, our own experiences and the needs of the individual and the rights, not so much the responsibility, that this entails.

Indeed, it seems creating ourselves, as a brand is becoming the seminal defining feat of contemporary postmodernism, it’s all about marketing ourselves, appearing in a certain way, both intellectual and visual, and becoming a certain perfect stereotype. This has all been aggressively reinforced since the dawn of the social media platforms of the internet, the further expansion of the branded shopping experience and the advent of the cult of celebrity. This then, brings the question whether social media, branded shopping and the celebrity cult helped reinforce the postmodern condition, or if the postmodern condition spawned, inevitably, social media, branded shopping and the cult of celebrity?

I believe that the fall of the grand narratives, and with that, the advent of the postmodern condition, was inevitable given the rapid increase of globalization in the past decades. As we see more of the world, explore more of the universe, understand more about physics and chemistry, as we learn more about how we all fit together in some uncanny way, it seems that rejecting the blacks and the whites of the single truth in favor of many colorful truths, was the only logical way to go.

This then, has had some major impacts on the creative arts, in music, films, media, design and architecture. Not only in the form of styles and ideas, but also the emergence of the designer as a status figure in society. Especially in the Scandinavian countries, for the past decade or so, there has been a massive surge in recruitment and education possibilities in creative disciplines, and it has become a cliché for young people to say they want to work with “something creative or in the media”.[2]

Most major cities today then, are full of hard evidence to the existence of the postmodern condition, buildings and complexes alike, temples to the personal brand, where the branded shop is the altar and image is god.

One such space, fully open and revealed to the public, is the iconoclastic Lloyds building in London’s financial district. Designed by architect Richard Rogers, who also worked on the similar Pompidou Centre in Paris together with Renzo Piano, it was completed in 1986 and is the youngest building to be classified as a grade-I listed building in the UK.[3] This building is a particularly interesting example because it caters to an overlapping state of conditions — firstly, it’s the home of Lloyds, one of London’s oldest and most respected financial institutions — clearly an organization that subscribe to the post world war II condition of capitalism. Yet, as already argued, capitalism is superseded[4] — not replaced, by the postmodern condition. So, here we find ourselves with a building that represents a part of the grand narratives that are still alive, yet have mutated into this monstrosity that is the search for individual happiness (truth) in the modern financial world. The building, through its deconstructed and jiggered surface somehow symbolizes the financial stability of the institution occupying it.

In “London: a guide to recent architecture”, Samantha Hardingham describes the central atrium with the following words:

“Inside, the atmosphere is awesomely cathedral-like… Light pours down into the canyon-like atrium space and additional light comes from large fittings, which also act as air extractors, set into the ceiling. The triple-glazed external cladding skin acts as an air duct from ceiling to floor.”

(Hardingham, 1999)

This might lead our thoughts to some allegorical link to the past grand narratives, churches, temples, seats of power etc., and this might hold even more credibility as we dive deeper into the geometrical analysis, spiral forms, crosses fused with circles and spheres are all incorporated into the façade and the building itself. But by adopting the view of Frederic Jameson, we can say that they are no longer quoting the deeper meaning previously attributed with them, they have in essence become, meaningless. A new style (although postmodernists reject the term style) emerges, one that is without originality and where the elements, to an ever increasing degree, reference only themselves.[5]

Jameson, a typical postmodern thinker, drew heavily on the works of Andy Warhol for reference — the line between the original and the copy are blurred to the point where he hypothesized that all original work have been created and that the future will only bring more copies and juxtapositions.

Being a young and perhaps naïve designer in the world of contemporary architecture and built environment, you could ask where we find our inspiration. Our drive to continue, if there are no grand narratives, no great stories to align our work with, how then do we still believe we can create original works?

At the beginning of the 21st century, it is perhaps time to realize that we have moved past the postmodern condition. That the human race is transcending into a new existence, powered by the ever-increasing globalization, cross-border collaboration, social media and data exchange on an immense scale. It is perhaps time to realize that we are moving into the post-postmodern condition, where we are actively looking for a new narrative.

Copenhagen, 2013.